the thing about the âwhy canât we say pregnant WOMEN instead of pregnant PEOPLE, PC gone mad!â discussion going on right now is that even the âcis allyâ side is kind of not understanding why, exactly, âofficialâ stuff about pregnancy needs to use gender neutral language.
the use of gendered language, whether in law or in company guidelines, has been used as an excuse to exclude trans people from various kinds of reproductive healthcare. there have been stories of abortion providers pointing to the use of âpregnant womenâ in all clinic literature to justify not giving trans men assistance. there are issues where âwomenâs health clinicsâ will refuse to accept referrals for anyone who doesnât have âFâ on their records, which of course includes many trans women. there are in turn stories of trans women being unable to access âmaleâ prostrate cancer screening.
language in this sort of capacity needs to be as factual and neutral and carefully constructed to avoid loopholes as possible. at this stage in my life, as a non-woman capable of pregnancy, i donât really CARE anymore if you talk casually about pregnancy as something that happens to women. but i DO care if the medical system writes out some guidelines that, in only acknowledging pregnant women as a possibility, open me up to the possibility of being denied care by transphobes who can claim theyâre just following the rules.
this is a real issue for us, the gendering of health care leading to single-sex guidelines which are actively used by assholes to say âno, we only treat [gender] hereâ. itâs not a matter of nitpicking over everyday language; itâs about ensuring we are safe from loopholes that can be used to exploit us.
jbbartram-illu
yousharknotpass
areudirty
pixelskylines
vaporwave
